Hypocrisy Between Friends Commentary

The link above will take you to a nice debate on vituperative commentary.
Below is a taste of the final post. If you like what you read here you may wish to take in the whole debate and add your thoughts.

RICH: Here's my last take on this, after which you gentlemen are welcome to the last word.

The fact is President Bush has never claimed that Al Queda was finished; Dowd made the claim for him and Ivins picked it up and ran with it.

Posted by rich at June 3, 2003 07:05 PM

BARRY B. Well there is no sense in continuing since you and I read from different points of view. Logic and reason fail to move you. Case in point:

You say:
“The fact is President Bush has never claimed that Al Qaida was finished; Dowd made the claim for him and Ivins picked it up and ran with it”.

The TRUTH IS:
Ivins said that Bush’s statements indicated that Al Queda was "broken up" not FINISHED but Damaged beyond effectiveness. So the fact IS that IVINS never claimed that Bush said Al Queda was FINISHED. However that is what you read into it because it is Molly Ivins saying it.

You over-react to IVINS because of your political viewpoint just as I react negatively to LIMBAUGH
So let's look at a Limbaugh comment:

"There is no greater testament to the depths to which the Democratic Party and liberalism have fallen. You now position yourself, Senator Daschle, to exploit future terrorist attacks for political gain. You are worse, sir, than the ambulance-chasing tort lawyers that make up your chief contributors. You, sir, are a disgrace. You are a disgrace to patriotism, you are a disgrace to this country, you are a disgrace to the Senate, and you ought to be a disgrace to the Democratic Party but sadly you’re probably a hero among some of them today...Way to demoralize the troops, Senator! What more do you want to do to destroy this country than what you’ve already tried? [pounding table] It is unconscionable what this man has done! This stuff gets broadcast around the world, Senator. What do you want your nickname to be? Hanoi Tom? Tokyo Tom? You name it, you can have it apparently. You sit there and pontificate on the fact that we’re not winning the war on terrorism when you and your party have done nothing but try to sabotage it, which you are continuing to do. This little speech of yours yesterday, and this appearance of yours on television last night, let’s call it what it is. It’s nothing more than an attempt to sabotage the war on terrorism for your own personal and your party’s political gain. This is cheap. And it’s beneath even you. And that’s pretty low." Friday Nov 15, 2002 The Rush Limbaugh Radio Program

Let’s see compared to Limbaugh’s fair-and-balanced comments Ivins is a creampuff.
Or do you find these LIMBAUGHTOMIZED comments civil Rich?

For good measure try on a very little Ann Coulter
Too much will make you ill: SEARCH THE DAILY HOWLER ARCHIVES IN JULY FOR A COMPLETE DE-BUNKING OF THE OUTRAGEOUS LIES OF ANN COULTER. I reccommend Bob Somersby at the Daily Howlerto everyone who seeks the truth.

"COULTER (SLANDER page 205): Except for occasional exotic safaris to the Wal-Mart or forays into enemy territory, liberals do not know any conservatives. It makes it easier to demonize them that way. It’s well and good for Andrew Sullivan to talk about a “truce.” But conservatives aren’t the ones who need to be jolted into the discovery that the “bogeymen” of their imagination are “not quite as terrifying as they thought.” Conservatives already know that people they disagree with politically can be “charming.” Also savagely cruel bigots who hate ordinary Americans and lie for sport."

Just a small sample from me to you since I am by Coulters lights a 'SAVAGELY CRUEL BIGOT WHO HATES ORDINARY AMERICANS AND LIES FOR SPORT'

Sorry Rich but that is my parting shot and I would gladly offer up this debate for review and vote on who made their point best

The point being that Molly Ivins and Tip O’Neil as your examples of didactic diatribe from liberal pundits in balance with Limbaugh, Liddy, Coulter, O'Reilly, Hannity, North, Robertson, Falwell, Novak, Scarborough, Savage etc... just don't measure up. But then I find it interesting that you even choose to debate the issue, which you could so easily admit.

Right wing conservative money buys the best most vituperative pundits. It is a simple unassailable fact.


Comments on the RTB Forum